GNU bug report logs - #65924
git searches coreutils and util-linux commands in PATH

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: bokr <at> bokr.com
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 65924 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Subject: bug#65924: git searches coreutils and util-linux commands in PATH
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 23:03:00 +0200

Hi,

On +2023-10-09 20:33:38 +0200, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> Am Montag, dem 09.10.2023 um 14:21 -0400 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com> writes:
> > 
> > > [...]
> > > If you need me to reduce it to four letters, yes, LGTM.
> > 
> > Explicit is better than implicit.  I've been thinking to document
> > this in our contributing section; e.g. a reviewed commit must have
> > the 'LGTM' from the reviewer.  If a series is LGTM, it needs to be
> > implicitly mentioned with 'this series LGTM'.  That may sound silly,
> > but I think it'd simplify reviewer/submitters interactions.
> s/implicitly/explicitly/?
> 
> I don't necessarily agree, but it's not a hard disagree either.  I'll
> try to keep that in mind at least when reviewing your patches to not
> cause confusion.
> 
> Cheers
>

TL;DR: Would it make sense to anticipate that LLM-bots will be used
to automate gathering of info for reviewers?

If so, what would a style guide for english in posts (like
a coding style guide, but for LLM-bot consumption) look like?
Some kind of literate programming for LLM-bot and human use?

(I assume experiments have been going on by now, though perhaps
not yet for guile or guix)
--
Regards,
Bengt Richter

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.